ArticleEuropean heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care2024
Patient knowledge about risk factors, achievement of target values, and guideline-adherent secondary prevention therapies 12 months after acute myocardial infarction.
Article in European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- High-sensitivity cardiac troponin and uncertainties in the diagnosis, treatment, and communication of risk in acute myocardial infarction.European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThe prospective GULLIVE-R study aimed to evaluate adherence to guideline-recommended secondary prevention, physicians' and patients' estimation of cardiac risk, and patients' knowledge about target values of risk factors after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS AND
resultsWe performed a prospective study enrolling patients 9-12 months after AMI. Guideline-recommended secondary prevention therapies and physicians as well as patients' estimation about their risk and patients' knowledge about target values were prospectively collected. Between July 2019 and June 2021, a total of 2509 outpatients were enrolled in 150 German centres 10 months after AMI. The mean age was 66 years, 26.4% were women, 45.3% had ST elevation myocardial infarction, 54.7% had non-ST elevation myocardial infarction, and 93.6% had revascularization (84.0% percutaneous coronary intervention, 7.4% coronary artery bypass graft, 1.8% both). Guideline-recommended secondary drug therapies were prescribed in over 80% of patients, while only about 50% received all five recommended drugs (aspirin, P2Y12 inhibitors, statins, beta-blockers, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors), and regular exercise was performed by only one-third. About 90% of patients felt well informed about secondary prevention, but the correct target value for blood pressure was known in only 37.9% and for LDL-cholesterol in only 8.2%. Both physicians and patients underestimated the objective risk of future AMIs as determined by the thormbolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) risk score for secondary prevention.
conclusionThere is still room for improvement in patient education and implementation of guideline-recommended non-pharmacological and pharmacological secondary prevention therapies in patients in the chronic phase after AMI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38768234What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.